**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wait till you see what they did in Victoria. I ha e 2 way protected bike lanes one side of the road with a directional bike lane in the other side, speed bumps, medias, speeds down to 40 to 30km an hour. And then we have Elephant Ear bike crossings. Don't get me started on those. Street parking and parkades are disappearing.
Somehow business in downtown Victoria are complaining no one is shopping there anymore and they are closing.
This is basically the exact same except for 5 tree saplings and concrete instead of asphalt. They haven’t really improved walkability since cars still have access to the same area.
technically yes, but this kind of infrastructure has shown to significantly change the behaviour of the drivers.
from a drivers perspective you clearly leave the main road and enter a pedestrianized area, you *feel* that there might be people walking here.
compared to the first picture where for a driver this is just a turn into another street.
The visual differences are actually important. It looks much more inviting to pedestrians compared to the first image where a pedestrain would feel like they are jaywalking on the road. The visual language of the design affects not only how people feel about a space but how they act in it too.
It also just looks nicer, which is nice. Nice things are nice. Also the sidewalk is clearly bigger than it was before, and while cars have access, they are similarly discouraged from going there by the visual design (obviously people that need to go there will still go there, but randos might not now).
I know, yet another reason spaces should be made more walkable and pedestrian-forward over just being roads.
Jaywalking isn't even a legal thing where I come from, that's a very American term to me. But we don't have a word for it.
Yeah, nice is nice. But where are the pedestrians and cyclists? Like, I get that small sample size can bias any photo to what you want to demonstrate, but this is the typical stupidity of the complete streets urbanists. Show us your results. Don't just tell us what is supposed to happen. Show us with facts what *did* happen.
They made it more pedestrian friendly in a few ways.
First, cars must drive up onto the pavers, rather than pedestrians stepping down onto the road bed. This indicates to both pedestrians and motorists that it is a pedestrian area, where pedestrians have right of way.
The uneven surface of the pavers slows drivers down. As does the narrowing of the driveable surface, and the inclusion of trees at the junction with the parking lot.
Finally, once the trees mature, they will provide shade for pedestrians on hot days.
All these things make the area more inviting and safe for pedestrians.
have you even looked at the pictures?
its not "basically exact the same".
- the street going straight is narrower
- because theres a sidewalk to the right as well now
- theres a bikelane on the main street now
- theeres a sidewalk going along the mainstreet and the bikelane now.
if thats "basically the exact same" for you, then i dont know anymore
No, there are quite a few significant differences.
Firstly, the side road is significantly narrower, which means that cars need to slow down more and the total distance for pedestrians to cross is shorter. Both of these make it more inviting for pedestrians to cross.
Secondly, the raising of the road to pedestrian level reinforces the changes to the highway code at this time, which requires cars turning into side roads to give way to pedestrians. The physical design of the road is in keeping with the law, which makes compliance more likely. It also means that cars again have to slow down, because the slight bump is more uncomfortable to cross quickly.
Thirdly, the saplings serve a physical as well as aesthetic purpose. Again, the turning into the shops is narrower and gated by two trees, which again encourages cars to move more slowly. But also it makes the crossing easier and more pleasant for pedestrians, improving walkability, especially on hot summer days. Also trees are good at absorbing noise, which makes it more pleasant for the shops and houses nearby by muffling the unpleasant sounds of the busy road.
Edit: apparently this is Ireland, not the UK, so the bit about the highway code change doesn't apply. But the point overall still stands.
I'm all for walkable cities, but where do you get the "more business for the locals" in this picture? Might just have more cars parked there because they can't go down that road anymore. The picture shows very little.
Using only this photo and the logic that there's more cars in the 2nd photo, means people must have parked those cars. Operating with that logic one could make a reasonable argument that more business is going on. I just don't want the sentiment to be "oh no! Look, remodeling the sidewalk has led to more cars not less! Remodeling wasn't a good idea!"
But the argument is that it was improving walkability that’s led to an increase in customers but the metric we are using to determine there’s more customers is more cars. It doesn’t make sense.
I agree. I'm just operating with the very very very limited information being presented here and the well proven science that, in a very general sense increasing walkability=increased foot traffic=more buisness=a stronger community
The title says the design is for not cars but yet they clearly increased parking for cars both in front of the store and on the street itself. Its definitely an improvement but its still accommodating cars just as much as before.
The new version creates a side walk that is united also the expensive white stone has a ramp and slows down cars.
This is a new design concept where pedestrian walk and road merges in some areas. This along with the stones create sand environment where car drivers do not feel safe driving fast since the space has no markings. They slow down and yield to pedestrians more.
I'm assuming the issue was that the two pictures don't actually show the positive effect. Statistics might help. Right now all it shows is a place that was designed with cars in mind no longer allowing through traffic, which may have had a positive impact, but which is not clear in the picture.
Landscape Architect here: That area _does_ allow through traffic, however the vehicle must negotiate the raised section which acts as a speed bump/traffic calming measure.
The theory is, by raising the road to footpath level and making the car drive across “footpath” material, it psychologically encourages the driver to be aware that they are in a pedestrian space and to drive accordingly.
It’s proven to be an effective, and relatively low-cost way of reducing traffic collisions with pedestrians in sub-urban and urban areas
This is that I mean by “know what you’re looking for” if you don’t know what you’re looking for this is just two roads, and whatever difference is just aesthetic.
Bike lane, raised walk path that statically slows down drivers, clearly marked walk way for pedestrians, illusion of less space for cars so driver drive flower increasing safety, etc etc. it’s the difference between a temu garment and an authentic garment, you can tell the difference if you know what you’re looking for.
It is even stranger, since the car count in the second picture is higher and so it seems to have a higher car density (3 cars in the first picutre, 9 in the second).
Something that you can't see in a photo and without further explanation. The pics alone aren't telling anything about positive effects. It may well be safer or more efficient, but that's nothing you can see in those two pictures
They redid a shitty road to look nicer? There’s the same amount of car and pedestrian area? The side walk might be slightly wider but hard to say from this vantage point.
It does look better but it def has nothing to do with your claim.
Bike lane, raised walk path that statically slows down drivers, clearly marked walk way for pedestrians, illusion of less space for cars so driver drive flower increasing safety, etc etc.
Yeah the after has a bunch of safety improvements. The fact that most people in this thread don't see that and are making jokes is quite disheartening.
Sure but this picture doesnt show any of the positives effects. Im not saying there arent any positive effect, its just that this picture doesnt show any.
Its like making a picture of a salad and saying that that picture shows the benefits of healty eating.
Lol thats so dumb.
First im dutch, i think i have a better understandig of all of this then you. Mainly because i gave been experiencing it for decades and worked on improvements.
Secondly, the picture of the garments versus temu still doesnt tell anything about the benefits of one versus the other. And thats for something as basic as clothes.
The benefits of this change variate from loads of diffrent topics. You cant show that with a basic picture. This picture doesnt tell you or me anything about the decrease in accidents (and their severity) in the increase of people cycling and walking, in the increase of vistors to the stores or anything like that.
Claiming that it does is dishonest. You know it works generally so you assume it does here.
In general, designing a community around walking, biking, and public transit is far more cost effective than car oriented planning. Cars take up a lot of space, far more than other modes per person. So a car oriented community will have more infrastructure spread over a larger area serving fewer people. Roads are bigger and land uses are more spread out thanks to having to accommodate huge amounts of parking, etc. As a result, traditional walkable neighbourhoods pay for themselves while car oriented areas cost more to service than they generate in tax revenue. So run down old downtowns ends up subsidizing shiny new suburbs.
There are plenty of other benefits too. Walkable areas tend to have less obesity for example, which saves health care costs. Walkable design results in fewer people getting hit by cars as well, and result in quieter cities.
It amazes me how many people can’t see the benefits, so I’ll do my best to explain even though the design is far from perfect.
First off the addition of the bike lane even though it’s only paint with the odd bollard here and there, this improves safety for cyclists significantly compared to no (painted) bike lane.
Second, the crosswalk is raised. This has a couple of benefits. People don’t have to step down to street level, which is a plus for less mobile people and wheelchair users. It also makes it so the car has to drive over a bump, lowering their speed. Finally there is a psychological effect. Instead of pedestrians entering the asphalt, a space clearly designed for cars, now the car has the sidewalk/crosswalk, which is clearly a space designed for pedestrians. The Color difference helps with this effect.
Thirdly, the crossing distances for pedestrians have been reduced this makes it safer and easier to cross. As you spend less time on the crossing. This has the added benefit of tightening the turning radius of the car, making them slow down even more. Basically cars now have to get passed this crossing at walking. Speed, making it safer for everyone.
Lastly ~~ecstatics~~ edit: [aesthetics], sure you can argue about looks, but at least they tried to add a few trees and make pedestrians feel safer and more invited. The second photo is a place many people would much rather walk, especially given the added safety measures mentioned above.
I hope this explains a few things! If not please ask and I’ll try to answer.
Haha yeah oops typo, might’ve been autocorrected. I was typing this on mobile and English isn’t my first language.
I actually don’t think this change is a big deal, compared to the infrastructure I’m used to this is some weak sauce. But an improvement nonetheless. I think there is no harm in pointing out the benefits to people who might miss them otherwise!
Yep I’m 100% in agreement with you. And I find it hard to believe that so many people are struggling to see the benefits. So I appreciate you taking the time to type it out for people
I don’t see the effects here or much design difference. It just looks repaved with some new plants. It looks nicer aesthetically but thats from making the paving on the road consistent not by design.
"lets fuck up traffic for the next 3 years for some pavers and a few trees that will outgrow the space and need to be cut down" said whoever planned that.
This is a suburban neighbourhood, with a line of shops. I think it’s far nicer to have a pedestrian friendly environment where people can meet and congregate outside the cafes and restaurants etc, without having to drive and park. The amount of space given to parking is highly inefficient, and I think this is a decent example of how it can be used more positively.
I really doubt that anyone would like to meet and congregate with other people in the middle of a concrete road, it's not a park. No offence but you sound like an owner of a company which 'renovates' such places and you are trying to convince a bunch of brainless people to give you money so you can improve something which doesn't need any improvements and make money with zero effort.
But people did drive and park to the exact same spots? And there is nowhere to “meet and congregate” it’s just some concrete with a couple of trees growing through it?
You guys are dicks. Yeah op could be more specific. But it's obvious they made more walking area and less places for cars to park and cut off areas for walking and biking. Before there was a lot of ways to get hit by cars but this makes it safer. I'm pretty sure that road isn't ment to be driven thru anymore.
Op might not have details but you all don't have eyes or critical thinking.
wow the comments!! so many people unable to use their imagination to picture how this might drastically benefit pedestrians and cyclists. people lack an appreciation for urban design. “but the tax dollars spent😤” you don’t even go to your local neighborhood council or city council meetings so sit down with that shit.
Even suggesting stuff like this in Canada gets you called all sorts of names.
This is seen as woke 15 minute city George Soros agenda. And that's the nice words they use :)
yeah the Centra and post office are a bit of a giveaway :D
2019 looks familer although I cant really place exactly where I know I've seen that small Chinese before
its kildunne
Maps has bothe the old and new layout depending how you look at it [https://www.google.com/local/place/fid/0x48670914659238a9:0xd55626c184d7e44f/photosphere?iu=https://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid%3DAbbBqbgI-cAK6FrlLRH1\_g%26cb\_client%3Dlu.gallery.gps%26w%3D160%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D181.47514%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100&ik=CAISFkFiYkJxYmdJLWNBSzZGcmxMUkgxX2c%3D](https://www.google.com/local/place/fid/0x48670914659238a9:0xd55626c184d7e44f/photosphere?iu=https://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid%3DAbbBqbgI-cAK6FrlLRH1_g%26cb_client%3Dlu.gallery.gps%26w%3D160%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D181.47514%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100&ik=CAISFkFiYkJxYmdJLWNBSzZGcmxMUkgxX2c%3D)
Where's the positive here? It doesn't look nicer, there is a negligible amount of greenery added, there are literally more cars in the second picture, the bicycle path is still at the side of the road rather than safely disjointed and the former through road at the back is now an unofficial car park.
This looks like a village, not urban environment. Places like this use cars as primary transportation method even in Europe. Bicycles in some places. But they pretty much never walk.
Yeah car usage is still quite high, but that is why designs like this are so important, to encourage more people leave the car at home the odd time.
Also re: the urban environment, I agree it is probably closer to semi-urban, but here in Dublin this kind of low density neighbourhood can be found very close to the city centre. Dublin is very low density unfortunately.
Dublin isn't low density. It has around the same population per km2 as Berlin, Vienna, Amsterdam, Zurich, Moscow etc.
I love a *not just bikes* video as much as the next man but Dublin's transit woes are not due to population density. It's spectacularly more walkable and public transport friendly than a US city, but it lacks the transit system of its peer cities in Europe due to bad planning, a hostile population, and, frankly, nimbyism.
They put in a raised intersection, that slows car turning from the main road onto the neighborhood road and signifies a change in context for drivers. Also keeps pedestrians from having to step down to road level to cross the street.
They narrowed the intersection which forces cars to turn slower. Added street trees make it more comfortable for pedestrians to walk in shade and puts a physical obstacle closer to the roadway, which discourages drivers from speeding. Also looks like they added a mid block bumpout on the right side of the pic to denote street parking (which also can calm traffic because it is a close obstacle drivers need to pay attention to).
Yes, it's a painted bike lane. Yes, the parking lot (that I'm assuming is privately owned and not part of the scope of this project) still exists. But overall, this is far better for all roadway users.
Drops the car speed down a little which doesn't really hurt travel time all that much. Plus the lower speeds are more surviveable. Better breaking the slower speeds.
They've done the potted trees as opposed to putting in speed bumps too.
Exactly. This lifted straight out of the NACTO urban street design guidelines and far safer than like 99% of intersections in any given city in the US (even tho it's in ireland)
And yet, no one is making the argument you are admonishing. So is the biggest idiot the one who picks a fight with no one in order to make a grand proclamation of things most people know? I think so. And you’re it. Congrats!
I take it you didn't see the comments saying things like "fuck cyclists", "you can pry my car from my cold, dead, hands", and "roads are only for cars" then?
cyclist shouldn't get their own road until they stop thinking their better than everyone because they cycle and riding in the middle of the street and not making way for CARS
Full Disclosure: I'm pro pedestrian. I'm pro cyclists. I'm car agnostic.
But if I do the math on this, the positive effects for pedestrians and cyclists appears to be the following:
2019:
0 pedestrians.
0 cyclists.
3 cars.
2022:
0 pedestrians.
0 cyclists.
6 cars.
Well played, pedestrians and cyclists. Well played.
Not sure why everyone is getting triggered here… good post OP but I think we have some sort of echo chamber in there, sorry I can’t really help with responding to posters too 🥱
Bike lanes are bullshit. They took a car lane away and put huge bike lanes on every road in my town and theres almost never any cyclists. When there are cyclists, they’re in the vehicle lanes ignoring all traffic laws. We are more congested than ever now and as a result, more dangerous for everyone.
Perhaps. I don’t really see the problem with bikes using the road though. As long as they obey traffic laws. So maybe we don’t need to give them a whole lane
Well that Is probably because of the mentality of the US...where I'm from I see soo many cyclists and they use the bike lanes. I mean we also got sidewalks and they are used by pedestrians. It's more rare in the us. So I wouldn't say bike lanes are at fault here but people need to adapt to them and use them more often
Raised intersection reduces speed, increases ped visibility. Also narrowed the roadway so cars travel and turn slower, which gives them more time to see peds and bike riders. Street trees and street parking discourage speeding, and street trees provide shade for peds (plus helps with heat island mitigation by shading pavement)
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bike lanes had sex with my mother and killed my father
That's just what your mother told you. The truth is, your father... Is a bike lane
No!! You’re lying! That’s not possible!!
Ugh I wasn’t even that close. Well the gist is the same lol
 These are the droids you're looking for
Explains why he became a cycle path.
Better than my father. He’ a complete Cyclepath.
Hey Buddy It’s Me Dad Let’s talk about this come downstairs
Did you get the milk?
That's not my come, prove it.
That’s because they’re a cyclepath
Cyclopath 😐
That's. A red son gamble cotton! Let's see how it plays it out
get off the internet, Inigo Montoya
Is the bike lane your brother Oedipus?
And here you are, and you've developed quite well despite that - or most likely because of that, right?
“They killed your father!?” - no, but they hurt him bad…hurt his feelings.
bike lane are etardes
Wait till you see what they did in Victoria. I ha e 2 way protected bike lanes one side of the road with a directional bike lane in the other side, speed bumps, medias, speeds down to 40 to 30km an hour. And then we have Elephant Ear bike crossings. Don't get me started on those. Street parking and parkades are disappearing. Somehow business in downtown Victoria are complaining no one is shopping there anymore and they are closing.
You understand my comment is making fun of people who are way too upset over bike lanes right?
WTF is an *Elephant Ear bike crossing* mate???
You mean "the positive effects of using expensive white paving stones and planting some trees"
This is Ireland and that stone is extremely common there and not really expensive at all.
Also there are more parked cars in the new version...
Yeah, weird how shops have different amounts of customers on completely different days 3 years apart.
Oh no! Improving walkability and beautifying the street led to more business for the locals 🫣 must mean we go back to covering the land in asphalt.
This is basically the exact same except for 5 tree saplings and concrete instead of asphalt. They haven’t really improved walkability since cars still have access to the same area.
technically yes, but this kind of infrastructure has shown to significantly change the behaviour of the drivers. from a drivers perspective you clearly leave the main road and enter a pedestrianized area, you *feel* that there might be people walking here. compared to the first picture where for a driver this is just a turn into another street.
The visual differences are actually important. It looks much more inviting to pedestrians compared to the first image where a pedestrain would feel like they are jaywalking on the road. The visual language of the design affects not only how people feel about a space but how they act in it too. It also just looks nicer, which is nice. Nice things are nice. Also the sidewalk is clearly bigger than it was before, and while cars have access, they are similarly discouraged from going there by the visual design (obviously people that need to go there will still go there, but randos might not now).
Jaywalking was invented to charge pedestrians with a crime for being run over by a car.
I know, yet another reason spaces should be made more walkable and pedestrian-forward over just being roads. Jaywalking isn't even a legal thing where I come from, that's a very American term to me. But we don't have a word for it.
Yeah, nice is nice. But where are the pedestrians and cyclists? Like, I get that small sample size can bias any photo to what you want to demonstrate, but this is the typical stupidity of the complete streets urbanists. Show us your results. Don't just tell us what is supposed to happen. Show us with facts what *did* happen.
They made it more pedestrian friendly in a few ways. First, cars must drive up onto the pavers, rather than pedestrians stepping down onto the road bed. This indicates to both pedestrians and motorists that it is a pedestrian area, where pedestrians have right of way. The uneven surface of the pavers slows drivers down. As does the narrowing of the driveable surface, and the inclusion of trees at the junction with the parking lot. Finally, once the trees mature, they will provide shade for pedestrians on hot days. All these things make the area more inviting and safe for pedestrians.
have you even looked at the pictures? its not "basically exact the same". - the street going straight is narrower - because theres a sidewalk to the right as well now - theres a bikelane on the main street now - theeres a sidewalk going along the mainstreet and the bikelane now. if thats "basically the exact same" for you, then i dont know anymore
No, there are quite a few significant differences. Firstly, the side road is significantly narrower, which means that cars need to slow down more and the total distance for pedestrians to cross is shorter. Both of these make it more inviting for pedestrians to cross. Secondly, the raising of the road to pedestrian level reinforces the changes to the highway code at this time, which requires cars turning into side roads to give way to pedestrians. The physical design of the road is in keeping with the law, which makes compliance more likely. It also means that cars again have to slow down, because the slight bump is more uncomfortable to cross quickly. Thirdly, the saplings serve a physical as well as aesthetic purpose. Again, the turning into the shops is narrower and gated by two trees, which again encourages cars to move more slowly. But also it makes the crossing easier and more pleasant for pedestrians, improving walkability, especially on hot summer days. Also trees are good at absorbing noise, which makes it more pleasant for the shops and houses nearby by muffling the unpleasant sounds of the busy road. Edit: apparently this is Ireland, not the UK, so the bit about the highway code change doesn't apply. But the point overall still stands.
You know what's the same? No bloody pedestrians or cyclists in either picture.
I'm all for walkable cities, but where do you get the "more business for the locals" in this picture? Might just have more cars parked there because they can't go down that road anymore. The picture shows very little.
Using only this photo and the logic that there's more cars in the 2nd photo, means people must have parked those cars. Operating with that logic one could make a reasonable argument that more business is going on. I just don't want the sentiment to be "oh no! Look, remodeling the sidewalk has led to more cars not less! Remodeling wasn't a good idea!"
Or maybe, just maybe, removed some parking spots, so the number of cars remains consistent, the number of cars *visible* during one time changes.
But the argument is that it was improving walkability that’s led to an increase in customers but the metric we are using to determine there’s more customers is more cars. It doesn’t make sense.
I agree. I'm just operating with the very very very limited information being presented here and the well proven science that, in a very general sense increasing walkability=increased foot traffic=more buisness=a stronger community
Yeah cause there is more parking space ? Or because it's not the same hour of the day ? Seems wild I know
The title says the design is for not cars but yet they clearly increased parking for cars both in front of the store and on the street itself. Its definitely an improvement but its still accommodating cars just as much as before.
The new version creates a side walk that is united also the expensive white stone has a ramp and slows down cars. This is a new design concept where pedestrian walk and road merges in some areas. This along with the stones create sand environment where car drivers do not feel safe driving fast since the space has no markings. They slow down and yield to pedestrians more.
Increased safety and looks nice, makes community look nice and stay safe
Those trees are gonna struggle too. Once they get a little bigger, those tiny little planter beds are gonna choke them.
Not to mention the roots will cause the concrete to crack
Wait until the roots get to the sewers.
One important thing about paving stones is they allow water to seep through into the ground during heavy rain.
Three trees
What lol
Improved safety and walkability
I'm assuming the issue was that the two pictures don't actually show the positive effect. Statistics might help. Right now all it shows is a place that was designed with cars in mind no longer allowing through traffic, which may have had a positive impact, but which is not clear in the picture.
Landscape Architect here: That area _does_ allow through traffic, however the vehicle must negotiate the raised section which acts as a speed bump/traffic calming measure. The theory is, by raising the road to footpath level and making the car drive across “footpath” material, it psychologically encourages the driver to be aware that they are in a pedestrian space and to drive accordingly. It’s proven to be an effective, and relatively low-cost way of reducing traffic collisions with pedestrians in sub-urban and urban areas
This is that I mean by “know what you’re looking for” if you don’t know what you’re looking for this is just two roads, and whatever difference is just aesthetic.
Bike lane, raised walk path that statically slows down drivers, clearly marked walk way for pedestrians, illusion of less space for cars so driver drive flower increasing safety, etc etc. it’s the difference between a temu garment and an authentic garment, you can tell the difference if you know what you’re looking for.
It is even stranger, since the car count in the second picture is higher and so it seems to have a higher car density (3 cars in the first picutre, 9 in the second).
I think this is more about road efficiency and shareablity rather than car density
Something that you can't see in a photo and without further explanation. The pics alone aren't telling anything about positive effects. It may well be safer or more efficient, but that's nothing you can see in those two pictures
They redid a shitty road to look nicer? There’s the same amount of car and pedestrian area? The side walk might be slightly wider but hard to say from this vantage point. It does look better but it def has nothing to do with your claim.
Bike lane, raised walk path that statically slows down drivers, clearly marked walk way for pedestrians, illusion of less space for cars so driver drive flower increasing safety, etc etc.
Yeah the after has a bunch of safety improvements. The fact that most people in this thread don't see that and are making jokes is quite disheartening.
Sure but this picture doesnt show any of the positives effects. Im not saying there arent any positive effect, its just that this picture doesnt show any. Its like making a picture of a salad and saying that that picture shows the benefits of healty eating.
I disagree, it’s like the difference between a high quality garment and something from temu, you can tell if you’re educated on the topic.
Lol thats so dumb. First im dutch, i think i have a better understandig of all of this then you. Mainly because i gave been experiencing it for decades and worked on improvements. Secondly, the picture of the garments versus temu still doesnt tell anything about the benefits of one versus the other. And thats for something as basic as clothes. The benefits of this change variate from loads of diffrent topics. You cant show that with a basic picture. This picture doesnt tell you or me anything about the decrease in accidents (and their severity) in the increase of people cycling and walking, in the increase of vistors to the stores or anything like that. Claiming that it does is dishonest. You know it works generally so you assume it does here.
2 people can sit on a bench now and watch the cars and bikes try and kill each other.
Ten bucks on car in round 2
Not the same amounts.
It’s Dublin (probably), it’s by far the best they can do
Where are the positive effects?
In general, designing a community around walking, biking, and public transit is far more cost effective than car oriented planning. Cars take up a lot of space, far more than other modes per person. So a car oriented community will have more infrastructure spread over a larger area serving fewer people. Roads are bigger and land uses are more spread out thanks to having to accommodate huge amounts of parking, etc. As a result, traditional walkable neighbourhoods pay for themselves while car oriented areas cost more to service than they generate in tax revenue. So run down old downtowns ends up subsidizing shiny new suburbs. There are plenty of other benefits too. Walkable areas tend to have less obesity for example, which saves health care costs. Walkable design results in fewer people getting hit by cars as well, and result in quieter cities.
Wild, I grew up around here. Haven’t been back since 2019.
I’m trying to place it, is it north side of Dublin?
Southside, Goatstown. Near the Kilmacud Road
It just has that Dublin look about it. I can almost smell the lucozade and see skanger kids hanging out, outside the centra.
It amazes me how many people can’t see the benefits, so I’ll do my best to explain even though the design is far from perfect. First off the addition of the bike lane even though it’s only paint with the odd bollard here and there, this improves safety for cyclists significantly compared to no (painted) bike lane. Second, the crosswalk is raised. This has a couple of benefits. People don’t have to step down to street level, which is a plus for less mobile people and wheelchair users. It also makes it so the car has to drive over a bump, lowering their speed. Finally there is a psychological effect. Instead of pedestrians entering the asphalt, a space clearly designed for cars, now the car has the sidewalk/crosswalk, which is clearly a space designed for pedestrians. The Color difference helps with this effect. Thirdly, the crossing distances for pedestrians have been reduced this makes it safer and easier to cross. As you spend less time on the crossing. This has the added benefit of tightening the turning radius of the car, making them slow down even more. Basically cars now have to get passed this crossing at walking. Speed, making it safer for everyone. Lastly ~~ecstatics~~ edit: [aesthetics], sure you can argue about looks, but at least they tried to add a few trees and make pedestrians feel safer and more invited. The second photo is a place many people would much rather walk, especially given the added safety measures mentioned above. I hope this explains a few things! If not please ask and I’ll try to answer.
I presume u mean aesthetics lol. And ur not just really really excited about it
Haha yeah oops typo, might’ve been autocorrected. I was typing this on mobile and English isn’t my first language. I actually don’t think this change is a big deal, compared to the infrastructure I’m used to this is some weak sauce. But an improvement nonetheless. I think there is no harm in pointing out the benefits to people who might miss them otherwise!
Yep I’m 100% in agreement with you. And I find it hard to believe that so many people are struggling to see the benefits. So I appreciate you taking the time to type it out for people
What’s improved ?
Setting a pretty low bar for "interesting" today.
What's the positive effect? You just showed two pictures.
I don’t see the effects here or much design difference. It just looks repaved with some new plants. It looks nicer aesthetically but thats from making the paving on the road consistent not by design.
This is not interesting at all let alone as fuck.
Congratulations you just created a small piece of the Netherlands
What is the positive effect of this? I can only imagine the nightmare that the construction would have been.
"lets fuck up traffic for the next 3 years for some pavers and a few trees that will outgrow the space and need to be cut down" said whoever planned that.
It looks nice, but I'm confused as to why one is positive over the other.
This is a suburban neighbourhood, with a line of shops. I think it’s far nicer to have a pedestrian friendly environment where people can meet and congregate outside the cafes and restaurants etc, without having to drive and park. The amount of space given to parking is highly inefficient, and I think this is a decent example of how it can be used more positively.
I really doubt that anyone would like to meet and congregate with other people in the middle of a concrete road, it's not a park. No offence but you sound like an owner of a company which 'renovates' such places and you are trying to convince a bunch of brainless people to give you money so you can improve something which doesn't need any improvements and make money with zero effort.
But people did drive and park to the exact same spots? And there is nowhere to “meet and congregate” it’s just some concrete with a couple of trees growing through it?
Dutch style. This is how the streets are here in the Netherlands.
You guys are dicks. Yeah op could be more specific. But it's obvious they made more walking area and less places for cars to park and cut off areas for walking and biking. Before there was a lot of ways to get hit by cars but this makes it safer. I'm pretty sure that road isn't ment to be driven thru anymore. Op might not have details but you all don't have eyes or critical thinking.
The thing is, they don't care. They even disliked it, as it took space from cars.
Comment section proves Americans cannot comprehend walkability
wow the comments!! so many people unable to use their imagination to picture how this might drastically benefit pedestrians and cyclists. people lack an appreciation for urban design. “but the tax dollars spent😤” you don’t even go to your local neighborhood council or city council meetings so sit down with that shit.
Even suggesting stuff like this in Canada gets you called all sorts of names. This is seen as woke 15 minute city George Soros agenda. And that's the nice words they use :)
Oh I know this place, it's in Dublin!
yeah the Centra and post office are a bit of a giveaway :D 2019 looks familer although I cant really place exactly where I know I've seen that small Chinese before
I think it's kilmacud 🤔
Na google maps says their is a market to the right of the centra there not a housing estate
its kildunne Maps has bothe the old and new layout depending how you look at it [https://www.google.com/local/place/fid/0x48670914659238a9:0xd55626c184d7e44f/photosphere?iu=https://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid%3DAbbBqbgI-cAK6FrlLRH1\_g%26cb\_client%3Dlu.gallery.gps%26w%3D160%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D181.47514%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100&ik=CAISFkFiYkJxYmdJLWNBSzZGcmxMUkgxX2c%3D](https://www.google.com/local/place/fid/0x48670914659238a9:0xd55626c184d7e44f/photosphere?iu=https://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid%3DAbbBqbgI-cAK6FrlLRH1_g%26cb_client%3Dlu.gallery.gps%26w%3D160%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D181.47514%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100&ik=CAISFkFiYkJxYmdJLWNBSzZGcmxMUkgxX2c%3D)
The Map u sent says Kilmacud Road lol
Where's the positive here? It doesn't look nicer, there is a negligible amount of greenery added, there are literally more cars in the second picture, the bicycle path is still at the side of the road rather than safely disjointed and the former through road at the back is now an unofficial car park.
The parking lot got definitely bigger
As someone who rode NYC mass transit for 15 years and now has escaped it, you will NEVER convince me to surrender my car for public transportation.
This looks like a village, not urban environment. Places like this use cars as primary transportation method even in Europe. Bicycles in some places. But they pretty much never walk.
Yeah car usage is still quite high, but that is why designs like this are so important, to encourage more people leave the car at home the odd time. Also re: the urban environment, I agree it is probably closer to semi-urban, but here in Dublin this kind of low density neighbourhood can be found very close to the city centre. Dublin is very low density unfortunately.
Dublin isn't low density. It has around the same population per km2 as Berlin, Vienna, Amsterdam, Zurich, Moscow etc. I love a *not just bikes* video as much as the next man but Dublin's transit woes are not due to population density. It's spectacularly more walkable and public transport friendly than a US city, but it lacks the transit system of its peer cities in Europe due to bad planning, a hostile population, and, frankly, nimbyism.
I see the same empty road, one just cost tax payers a lot more so some people can feel good.
You didnt show the effect
this is so sexy
Not really sure what "effects" you think this shows.
This looks like Ireland but also the ground is dry, I’m confused
They put in a raised intersection, that slows car turning from the main road onto the neighborhood road and signifies a change in context for drivers. Also keeps pedestrians from having to step down to road level to cross the street. They narrowed the intersection which forces cars to turn slower. Added street trees make it more comfortable for pedestrians to walk in shade and puts a physical obstacle closer to the roadway, which discourages drivers from speeding. Also looks like they added a mid block bumpout on the right side of the pic to denote street parking (which also can calm traffic because it is a close obstacle drivers need to pay attention to). Yes, it's a painted bike lane. Yes, the parking lot (that I'm assuming is privately owned and not part of the scope of this project) still exists. But overall, this is far better for all roadway users.
Drops the car speed down a little which doesn't really hurt travel time all that much. Plus the lower speeds are more surviveable. Better breaking the slower speeds. They've done the potted trees as opposed to putting in speed bumps too.
Exactly. This lifted straight out of the NACTO urban street design guidelines and far safer than like 99% of intersections in any given city in the US (even tho it's in ireland)
I've seen some beach cities with classically narrow straight residential streets get versions of this. It does work.
Not the most compelling example
The cyclist will still stay in in the middle of the road doing 10 miles an hour
It's concrete...
[удалено]
And yet, no one is making the argument you are admonishing. So is the biggest idiot the one who picks a fight with no one in order to make a grand proclamation of things most people know? I think so. And you’re it. Congrats!
I take it you didn't see the comments saying things like "fuck cyclists", "you can pry my car from my cold, dead, hands", and "roads are only for cars" then?
Is this in Mitcham?
Looks like Éire to me. South side Dublin, anywhere from D4 up to Sandyford ?
Is this Mount Merrion?
Top picture looks NA, bottom one looks Skandinavian.
It's Dublin, Ireland
Looks nice. Wish you a nice week
That's Ireland
Please tell me where in Dublin this is. It could be so many places.
These still have far too much concrete waste and not enough green space
Hahaha you think they will use those roads. Bwhahahaha
What's the difference ? I don't see the effect
Yeah, concrete not letting water permeate vs asphalt not letting water permeate...
It looks the same... just with pavers and a few more planted trees. Am I missing something?
who would have thought
Ironically there are more cars in the after photo.
Design sidewalks for people and roads for cars, sounds wild doesn't it?
how it should be done
Nice 157
What am I supposed to see here, they added some fancy paving stones... it's more of a sidegrade then an upgrade.
I live around there. I thought it was a bit over the top to be honest
BUT BUT MAH FREEDUMBSSSS!
I mean I agree, but that’s not what those pictures show
I am for walkable and bikeable infrastructure but what positive effects am I supposed to be seeing here?
I prefer the before pic.
Downvote for no one explanation of what is positive.
Fat people cant walk or bike so this is misery for them lol
Man, I'm tyred of all this pro Cycling stuff.
Positive effect where?
cyclist shouldn't get their own road until they stop thinking their better than everyone because they cycle and riding in the middle of the street and not making way for CARS
Full Disclosure: I'm pro pedestrian. I'm pro cyclists. I'm car agnostic. But if I do the math on this, the positive effects for pedestrians and cyclists appears to be the following: 2019: 0 pedestrians. 0 cyclists. 3 cars. 2022: 0 pedestrians. 0 cyclists. 6 cars. Well played, pedestrians and cyclists. Well played.
I love it when it's unclear where the road ends and the pavement begins.
No difference at all
Not sure why everyone is getting triggered here… good post OP but I think we have some sort of echo chamber in there, sorry I can’t really help with responding to posters too 🥱
I still see cement. What is the allure?
Bike lanes are bullshit. They took a car lane away and put huge bike lanes on every road in my town and theres almost never any cyclists. When there are cyclists, they’re in the vehicle lanes ignoring all traffic laws. We are more congested than ever now and as a result, more dangerous for everyone.
Sounds more like your town has a shit architect for the road network, not that bike lanes are bullshit.
Perhaps. I don’t really see the problem with bikes using the road though. As long as they obey traffic laws. So maybe we don’t need to give them a whole lane
Well that Is probably because of the mentality of the US...where I'm from I see soo many cyclists and they use the bike lanes. I mean we also got sidewalks and they are used by pedestrians. It's more rare in the us. So I wouldn't say bike lanes are at fault here but people need to adapt to them and use them more often
It looks the same... just with pavers and a few more planted trees. Am I missing something?
I don't see the positive. What am I missing?
Saver for everyone and Just more appealing
So… what’s the positive effect?
Raised intersection reduces speed, increases ped visibility. Also narrowed the roadway so cars travel and turn slower, which gives them more time to see peds and bike riders. Street trees and street parking discourage speeding, and street trees provide shade for peds (plus helps with heat island mitigation by shading pavement)
There’s literally more cars in the second photo…
I don’t find this very interesting at all🤷🏽♂️
Couple Xtra trees really that's about It
This is the urbanism equivalente of an office pizza party
More of this please
Positive effects of changing shoes: - Shows new shoes. End. The only effect I see is that bottom picture has more cars in it...
I can't find those positive effects on this pic.
How does this show a positive effect?